Fix the income tax debate

[Drytoast]

Because it's not a simple fix? It would be monumentally complicated, and that's even before the collective bargaining aspect.

You have no leg to stand on calling other people's stuff "nonsense" when you tried to eliminate the US federal taxes from the discussion.

The amount deducted against the cap is take home pay after taxes. Not before taxes.

Oh gee. how hard was that? This would allow Ottawa to effectively have a higher cap floor and ceiling than Florida but because of revenue sharing they would be ok.

 

[triggrman]

Just make the cap the rough expected after tax salary, base all contracts (regardless of games played) on should the player play the full season, ie half the games at home and half the games on the road (with what the tax rates in each state/province of away games). Also include the signing bonuses based on what tax they paid on it.

Should get you much closer to actual after tax salary, and that be the cap hit. So doesn’t matter where a player plays the tax is not counted to the cap hit bringing in better parity.

Of course they can make it as technical as they want (the league/teams can hire pretty good accountants to figure out what the “expected after tax pay to be”) do they bring property tax in? There’s a lot to it.

Would have to take into consideration of trades, ie when player is traded there cap is adjusted to the schedule for the new team.

Won’t solve all the issues, people still have reasons to play wherever, but at least make the tax not one of them.

I don’t really know the best option but it is clearly turning into an unfair advantage.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned.

It's only unfair when it's not your team getting that locations advantage.
We should also adjust for all endorsement earnings because smaller markets don't get that advantage.

 

[Salsero1]

The amount deducted against the cap is take home pay after taxes. Not before taxes.

Oh gee. how hard was that? This would allow Ottawa to effectively have a higher cap floor and ceiling than Florida but because of revenue sharing they would be ok.

And when Ottawa still cant win it all, what next?

 

[Summer Rose]

I could just ban everyone who bitches about it, that would put a stop to it pretty quickly

Works for me.

 

[archangel2]

we need a sticky with all the threads we have about how to fix the tax problem

 

[thebeernerd]

What are you talking about, I love debating this non-issue that was very obviously planted by special interest groups on either side of the border to get hockey fans to act against their own economic interests

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

The amount deducted against the cap is take home pay after taxes. Not before taxes.

Oh gee. how hard was that? This would allow Ottawa to effectively have a higher cap floor and ceiling than Florida but because of revenue sharing they would be ok.

Writing a sentence? Not hard at all. Figuring out all of the nuance with player movement (in-season and off-season), bonus structure, player residence, maybe even charitable contributions deductions (depending on how much you want to "solve" the problem) probably a lot harder.

 

[Rec T]

I could just ban everyone who bitches about it, that would put a stop to it pretty quickly

Or at least those who are strongly implying that if you don't agree with their cherry picked data that you are the moron and any rebuttal will be ignored because you're just too dumb to understand...

 

[StrangeVision]

I posted you links, sources and player quotes. All you've done is post me emotion. Nor have you or anyone else provided a reasonable answer as to why this change shouldn't happen. You all just misdirect or pivot to the Leafs.

So ya. I think we are done here kiddo.

Oh and as for the claim of Carolina barley being taxed...here. Here's data. (that thing you can't provide btw)

Canada (highest overall tax burden)​

Montreal Canadiens — ~50%
Toronto Maple Leafs — ~53%
Ottawa Senators — ~50%
Winnipeg Jets — ~47%
Edmonton Oilers — ~48%
Calgary Flames — ~48%
Vancouver Canucks — ~50%

---

High-tax US states​

Minnesota Wild — ~9.85%
New York Rangers — ~10.9%
New York Islanders — ~10.9%
Buffalo Sabres — ~10.9%
Los Angeles Kings — ~13.3%
Anaheim Ducks — ~13.3%
San Jose Sharks — ~13.3%
Boston Bruins — ~5%–9% (varies by bracket effect)

---

Mid-tax US states​

Chicago Blackhawks — ~4.95%
Philadelphia Flyers — ~3–4% local + ~5–6% effective
New Jersey Devils — ~6.5%–10%
Washington Capitals — ~5.75%
St. Louis Blues — ~4.8%
Pittsburgh Penguins — ~3–4%
Columbus Blue Jackets — ~4.8%
Detroit Red Wings — ~4.25%
Colorado Avalanche — ~4.4%

---

Low-tax US states​

Carolina Hurricanes — ~3.99%
Arizona Coyotes (historical) — ~2.5%–4.5%

---

No state income tax (lowest)​

Florida Panthers — 0%
Tampa Bay Lightning — 0%
Dallas Stars — 0%
Vegas Golden Knights — 0%
Nashville Predators — 0%
Seattle Kraken — 0%

Hold up, are you under the impression that Floridians, Tennesseans, Washingtonians, Texans, and Nevadans pay zero taxes on their income?

 

[garyjones93]

It's only unfair when it's not your team getting that locations advantage.
We should also adjust for all endorsement earnings because smaller markets don't get that advantage.

Sure, albeit a little harder to bring non NHL salaries endorsements into it, but sure find a way….

But also like I said it’s never going to be perfect, can’t make it +20 in Winnipeg in the winter.

There will always be advantages and disadvantages everywhere, being competitive and well run is the best advantage. But there’s definitely a huge advantage with the lower-no tax. Advantage to access to better endorsements or weather, or being closer to home or playing for a team grew up idolizing or being able to walk around the city without being hounded. It would be impossible to make everything perfectly fair.

But don’t act like the tax isn’t a big factor right now, yeah the leafs endorsements vs
ottawas is a massive advantage as well, can that be fixed, maybe.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

sure. add your base 37 percent. it's still lower. in some cases by almost 20% what's your point? I just posted you a poll from the players themselves telling you it matters. This conversation is over. They have told you all, it matters. We are done here.

Got an argument as to why we can't deal with it now besides your feelings or?

NHL free agency shows teams in states with no income tax have an advantage

When the Tampa Bay Lightning made moves at the NHL draft to clear salary cap space, general manager Julien BriseBois hoped a variety of factors would entice players to sign as free agents.

www.tsn.ca

"Averaging out Reinhart's salary to $8.625 million annually, he owes $3.15 million in taxes in Florida. He would pay $1.1 million more in California, $1.5 million more in New York and $1.4 million more in Toronto, according to a calculator provided publicly by Cardinal Point Athlete Advisors."

(this is where you make some personal insult or something)

Just so you know - that calculator has been proven to be flawed. It takes the salary x the state tax differential like players don't pay taxes where the games are played.

CA: 8.625M x 13.3% (max CA state income tax rate) = $1.147M

Just want to make sure you understand that is not how state income tax works.

it shouldn't play a role. at all. lol that's the point. I've posted you the math using Rienhardt's latest contract in Florida as an example as to how much more he would pay in taxes over the term of the contract.

I got Brad telling you straight up that the no state tax advantage allowed them to resign all three of their UFA's without losing any. That it MATTERED. I got a poll telling you from players that it MATTERS.

So do you have any sound reasoning as to why we shouldn't fix this other than insulting my mother or w/e nonsense you've brought to the table so far?

I get in a perfect world - it shouldn't matter. You also had FLA players telling the world that the Leafs would win if wasn't for all the pressure from the media. Ever think that Brad might just be trolling fans? From a practical perspective though - the league wanted to increase parity - not ensure perfect $ competion.

Was money the only consideration to Marner? If the Leafs were offering him more than Vegas even after taxes, why wouldn't he have resigned in Toronto? Was money the only consideration to Stamkos 10 years ago, when the Leafs were bringing major advertisers to his meeting with the team? Why do John Carlson and Vinnie Trochek want to stay in the Eastern conference? Does it have something to do with getting to travel less than half the miles than a CA or Western Canada based team? How is that fair? How about having to live in Winnepeg? How about no salary cap for coaching, scouts, and front office staff? Does that promote "fair competition"? No personal attacks here - just trying to maybe broaden your perspective to how others think about this topic.

 

[MMC]

Or at least those who are strongly implying that if you don't agree with their cherry picked data that you are the moron and any rebuttal will be ignored because you're just too dumb to understand...

They should get jail time IMO

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Team Canada should say that they're not picking players from US-based teams. That'll solve everything.

 

[Captain Mountain]

It's only unfair when it's not your team getting that locations advantage.
We should also adjust for all endorsement earnings because smaller markets don't get that advantage.

Part of the reason the cap exists is because some teams couldn't match the spending of others. It became enough of a problem that the league eventually did something about it.

Tax advantage is starting to/has become the number 1 consideration of most players. That's being offered up by players and agents (anonymously) for a while now. Endorsement earnings or other tax planning strategies haven't come close to affecting that.

I don't know if its as bad as the pre-cap market imbalance, but its not really as hard a fix to address. Leagues generally take steps to address competitive imbalances if they get big enough, its just not there yet.

I don't think the NHL cares if the group of advantaged teams is the Leafs, Rangers, Kings, Bruins, etc. or Panthers, Lightning, Stars, Golden Knights, etc., if their parity is seriously threatened then they're going to act.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Sure, albeit a little harder to bring non NHL salaries endorsements into it, but sure find a way….

But also like I said it’s never going to be perfect, can’t make it +20 in Winnipeg in the winter.

There will always be advantages and disadvantages everywhere, being competitive and well run is the best advantage. But there’s definitely a huge advantage with the lower-no tax. Advantage to access to better endorsements or weather, or being closer to home or playing for a team grew up idolizing or being able to walk around the city without being hounded. It would be impossible to make everything perfectly fair.

But don’t act like the tax isn’t a big factor right now, yeah the leafs endorsements vs
ottawas is a massive advantage as well, can that be fixed, maybe.

Just to acknowledge - I think that everyone understands that there is tax difference, and that it is a factor when UFA's makes decisions. I personally believe that it's just MUCH less of a factor than going to a competitive team, and probably on par with considerations like closeness to family, weather, culture, etc. Historically most premier UFA's went to the biggest markets with the worst taxes (NYC, TOR, etc.) so I don't think that taxes is primary factor. It doesn't help that the hockey media (most of it in TOR catering primarily to the GTA, but also all Canadian fans) VASTLY oversimplifies and magnifies the tax difference.

If you are a star player - how difficult would it be in TOR to make up $500K of take home difference due to taxes vs. a no-tax state? I would bet it would be pretty easy.

 

[Nineteen67]

if it wasn't an issue, why do players talk about it and say its an issue?

Why do players ask for 13.5 14 mil from Toronto but take 10 11 12 from a no state tax team??? HMMMMM I wonder what the difference is?

It has as much to do with the city, the weather, etc. as it does the taxes. Some people prefer it, most don’t.
Same with New York. If you want to pay the higher city tax, you can live there, but I assume most players live in NJ and avoid it.
Quality of life between different NHL cities is not something the NHL can fix. Nor should they.

 

[Mr Positive]

I doubt they would do a solution like making the cap about take home pay.

It's bad enough for Canadian teams to pay players in American dollars. They have to cover all the Canadian taxes too?

It does seem like the currency debate that popped up a few times. I dont think the league will go there.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Part of the reason the cap exists is because some teams couldn't match the spending of others. It became enough of a problem that the league eventually did something about it.

Tax advantage is starting to/has become the number 1 consideration of most players. That's being offered up by players and agents (anonymously) for a while now. Endorsement earnings or other tax planning strategies haven't come close to affecting that.

I don't know if its as bad as the pre-cap market imbalance, but its not really as hard a fix to address. Leagues generally take steps to address competitive imbalances if they get big enough, its just not there yet.

I don't think the NHL cares if the group of advantaged teams is the Leafs, Rangers, Kings, Bruins, etc. or Panthers, Lightning, Stars, Golden Knights, etc., if their parity is seriously threatened then they're going to act.

MLB going to lockout specifically for the same reason. Dodgers.

 

[Captain97]

Essentially would have to do a calculation of how much each player loses on taxes as a percentage in each market and do a cost of living analysis to account for cheaper/more expensive locations non-income tax taxes (sales tax, property tax, etc.)

From there build a calculator that allows teams to enter contracts and game schedules (due to road game taxes being different) into it and provide those as a bonus to players at the end of the year based on losses for taxes and adjustments for costs of living.

Tbh wouldn't be that hard to build, nhl could hire a couple devs and contract some tax accountants to consult on optimal tax strategies jurisdiction and have it done by the end of next season.

Cap remains before tax but teams essentially have top ups for tax burdens and credits for government services done. Could also allow teams could hire accountant/tax planners in house to help players manage the differences and use this tool.

 

[chaz4hockey]

I posted you links, sources and player quotes. All you've done is post me emotion. Nor have you or anyone else provided a reasonable answer as to why this change shouldn't happen. You all just misdirect or pivot to the Leafs.

So ya. I think we are done here kiddo.

Oh and as for the claim of Carolina barley being taxed...here. Here's data. (that thing you can't provide btw)

Canada (highest overall tax burden)​

Montreal Canadiens — ~50%
Toronto Maple Leafs — ~53%
Ottawa Senators — ~50%
Winnipeg Jets — ~47%
Edmonton Oilers — ~48%
Calgary Flames — ~48%
Vancouver Canucks — ~50%

---

High-tax US states​

Minnesota Wild — ~9.85%
New York Rangers — ~10.9%
New York Islanders — ~10.9%
Buffalo Sabres — ~10.9%
Los Angeles Kings — ~13.3%
Anaheim Ducks — ~13.3%
San Jose Sharks — ~13.3%
Boston Bruins — ~5%–9% (varies by bracket effect)

---

Mid-tax US states​

Chicago Blackhawks — ~4.95%
Philadelphia Flyers — ~3–4% local + ~5–6% effective
New Jersey Devils — ~6.5%–10%
Washington Capitals — ~5.75%
St. Louis Blues — ~4.8%
Pittsburgh Penguins — ~3–4%
Columbus Blue Jackets — ~4.8%
Detroit Red Wings — ~4.25%
Colorado Avalanche — ~4.4%

---

Low-tax US states​

Carolina Hurricanes — ~3.99%
Arizona Coyotes (historical) — ~2.5%–4.5%

---

No state income tax (lowest)​

Florida Panthers — 0%
Tampa Bay Lightning — 0%
Dallas Stars — 0%
Vegas Golden Knights — 0%
Nashville Predators — 0%
Seattle Kraken — 0%

You have CONVENIENTLY left out the USA Federal Tax rate which is 37% for a big part of a player’s income.

Your charts are a mess of inaccuracy.

 

[chaz4hockey]

Essentially would have to do a calculation of how much each player loses on taxes as a percentage in each market and do a cost of living analysis to account for cheaper/more expensive locations non-income tax taxes (sales tax, property tax, etc.)

From there build a calculator that allows teams to enter contracts and game schedules (due to road game taxes being different) into it and provide those as a bonus to players at the end of the year based on losses for taxes and adjustments for costs of living.

Tbh wouldn't be that hard to build, nhl could hire a couple devs and contract some tax accountants to consult on optimal tax strategies jurisdiction and have it done by the end of next season.

Cap remains before tax but teams essentially have top ups for tax burdens and credits for government services done. Could also allow teams could hire accountant/tax planners in house to help players manage the differences and use this tool.

In a capitalistic world:
Memo to high tax locations/markets, lower your cost base to compete.

 

[Drytoast]

And when Ottawa still cant win it all, what next?

Who cares? We are talking about state tax advantage in this thread

 

[Drytoast]

You have CONVENIENTLY left out the USA Federal Tax rate which is 37% for a big part of a player’s income.

Your charts are a mess of inaccuracy.

Even with the baseline 37 percent.doesnt negate the advantage. Never mind the fact that you're ignoring the analysis links, the polls, the salary breakdown, math of how much is saved, or the term of an 8-year contract. You're just being disingenuous and I asked you why not just fix the problem. It's easy. You'll give me some bullshit not answering pivot to the leafs. You are what we call a dishonest actor

 

[Golden_Jet]

Even with the baseline 37 percent.doesnt negate the advantage. Never mind the fact that you're ignoring the analysis links, the polls, the salary breakdown, math of how much is saved, or the term of an 8-year contract. You're just being disingenuous and I asked you why not just fix the problem. It's easy. You'll give me some bullshit not answering pivot to the leafs. You are what we call a dishonest actor

Only one being dishonest is your chart , that you haven’t fixed yet .